Many readers see To Kill a Mockingbird as having two parts, one centering on Arthur Radley and the other on the trial of Tom Robinson. How were the two stories brought together at the end of the novel? When you were reading the novel, how did you handle the shift of emphasis from Boo Radley to the trial?
At the end of the novel, the two stories are brought together when Bob Ewell - angry because the trial did not make him a hero, but rather offered Atticus the opportunity to destroy Bob's "last shred of credibility" (p. 218) - tries to kill Atticus' children, but is unsuccessful because he is stabbed by Boo Radley, who has been watching over Scout and Jem from the beginning of the novel, and who the children were deeply curious about during especially the first part of the novel.
I did not really notice the shift of emphasis from Boo Radley to the trial when it first began to occur around chapter 12, but as the book went on, I started to get increasingly bored and lose interest in the novel as the story started focusing more and more on the trial and as Scout began to act more "ladylike", and the narrative became more dry and lost most of its humour because Scout and Jem were older.
~Anne, 20/05/2009
...It would be nice if someone else could post something, so I didn't feel so much like I was talking to myself, but whatever.
I was rather disappointed by the ending of this novel. I felt it left a lot of questions open to interpretation, and as a reader I felt unsatisfied. It was kind of like one of those not-so-incredible movies where you can tell as soon as it ends, even though it's just come out, that there's already a sequel underway. Except in this case, there doesn't appear to even be a sequel. She just leaves you hanging. Some of the questions I had while I was reading that were not addressed throughout the course of the novel are as follows: Did Atticus have a particular reason for taking on Tom Robinson's case, besides just his belief in equal rights for everyone inside the courtroom? How did Atticus earn the title "One-Shot Finch" and was there a reason he later came to despise guns other than, as Miss Maudie speculates on page 98, the fact that he felt he had an "unfair advantage over most living things"? What happened to Uncle Jack? Francis? How about Uncle Jimmy, whom Aunt Alexandra abandoned when she came to stay with the Finches? Did Aunt Alexandra ever leave, by the way? What was up with Dill? That is, why did he lie about his family all the time, and why did he run away from home? Did he and Scout actually end up getting married? What was Miss Maudie's new house like? What happened to Miss Caroline (how long did she survive as a teacher)? What happened to Mayella Ewell, and, in fact, all of the Ewell children now that Bob Ewell was dead? Did Nathan Radley and old Mr. Radley have actual jobs or did they just "buy cotton" as Jem said? Where did they go everyday, and what did they do? What was Nathan's attitude toward his brother, Arthur? Toward the Finch children?
...I won't go on, but I will say that I thought this book was really good for the first 11 chapters, but from there until the end it seemed to decline, getting progressively worse and more boring until it reached the total opposite of a climax as I struggled through the last few pages just to get it over with. That is my opinion of the novel, and it is surprising (to me) because I usually enjoy the novels I have to read for English class.
~Anne, 23/05/2009
I thought it definitely had two parts although in the end they were tied together because in Tom Robinson's case it was Bob Ewell who accused him of rapeing his daughter although in the end Bob Ewell tried to attack Atticus' children and it was Boo Radley who saved them. Boo had not been outside of his home for years and years but when the kids needed him the most he was there and saved their lives. Although Boo had nothing to do with the trial in the beginning of the novel he was a very important part of the story because the kids had an obsession with him and were constantly talking about him or scheming to get him out of his house. Boo comes back in the end of the novel as the hero who saves the Finch children. The ending shocked me because I would never have thought Bob Ewell would go so far to make Atticus' life meserable, as Anne had said earlier it leaves alot of questions in the readers mind although its almost better like that because it is left to the imagination. The reader really has a chance to create there own story of what might have happened after the night of the pageant. Overall I really enjoyed the novel more then expected.
~Megan 23/05/09
I agree with Anne, I didn't take note of a drastic switch between the two events until around chapter 12, which is about when it started to be more of a chore to read because of the dragging on of the trial and lack of exciting happenings. But then the novel started to pick up again when Boo saved the children from the drunken Bob Ewell. It was somewhat of a pain when Harper Lee would focus on one event for a while, then stop before the climax of the event and switch to the other, and so on, because by the time the focus was shifted to the initial event, i had either forgotten key points or began to loose interest.
Steven 24/06/09
Ya, since the novel only had two main parts, with two main climactic events, I personally think that this novel was in a way, unmemorable and boring at some parts, I also think there is a lot of useless storytelling at times, but in the long run it helps with the atmosphere of Maycomb. I agree with Anne, in that the two main stories are brought together through the effects on the trial on Bob Ewell, and then Boo stabbing him, I also agree with Anne, in that the narrative became very dull and boring after Scout and Jem matured. I think that the book still did leave some questions, however those questions, I think, aren't so important in that it draws away from the book. All in all, I think that the book was a good tale of the american south, that transitioned between two key factors, that come together rather fluidly in the end of the novel.
-Dylan 24/06/09
What was your favourite part in this book so far? Why? What part made you laugh the most?
~Anne, 11/05/2009
My favorite part was definitely the hearing with Atticus defending Tom Robinson, it had me wanting to read more and I couldnt put the book down. Although I must say I was dissapointed that Atticus had not won the case but it really shows how the white society didnt care about the actual case and evidence they based their votes solely on the color of skin. This was my favorite part of the book so far because it kept the reader wanting to know more and as the case went along we really didnt know who was going to win until the very end when Tom was voted guilty.
~Megan 12/05/2009
I agree with Megan, in that the hearing was my favorite part, and the only reason why I think this is anyones favorite part is because it is one of the few suspenseful points in the novel, which I think came just at the right time before the book could get boring. I was also dissapointed in Atticus' defeat, however I think this isn't going to be the last time we see Tom Robinson. One part that didnt really make me laugh, but was funny, was in chapter seven, when Jem went through an Egyptian phase. "The sixth grade seemed to please him from the beginning: he went through a brief Egyptian Period that baffled me - he tried to walk flat a great deal, sticking one arm in front of him and one in back of him, putting one foot behind the other. He declared Egyptians walked that way."
-Dylan 13/05/2009
Interesting. My favourite part was actually around pages 85 to 89, when Scout talked to Uncle Jack and told him he wasn't fair because he hadn't listened to her side of the story after she beat up Francis, and later that evening when Uncle Jack talked to Atticus and told him he would never marry because he might have children. I found that entire part highly amusing, in a good way, which is why it's my favourite part. The trial, I found rather long and tedious, and it didn't actually interest me that much.
In terms of the part that made me laugh the most, many parts of this novel made me chuckle, but there were only two, I think, that made me laugh out loud. The first of these is on page 25, when Miss Caroline screams "It's alive!" and points at Burris Ewell, and Little Chuck Little responds, somewhat confused, "You mean him, ma'am? Yessum, he's alive. Did he scare you some way?". The second, which some of you may not have read yet, is on page 252, when Scout informs us she is going to play the part of a ham in the Halloween pageant ("Mrs. Grace Merriweather had composed an original pageant entitled Maycomb County: Ad Astra Per Aspera, and I was to be a ham.").
~Anne, 13/05/2009
I did not find any parts in the novel that actually made me laugh out loud but the characters and their personalities can be highly entertaining to read. All of the characters in the book or completely different other than the fact that the 3 children are all mischevious and adventurous. The fact that the characters are all different make the book more entertaining to read but I did not find many parts in the novel that actually made me laugh out loud. I never thought of pages 85-89 but that was a very interesting part to the novel although I stick with my first answer in that the hearing remains my favorite part so far.
~Megan 17/05/09
Ya nothing really made me laugh, and the reason for this is just because it is simply older humor, that is sometimes hard to get. However, this does not mean I didn't find anything funny, it just means it isn't the type of humor that would make me laugh out loud.
-Dylan 18/05/09
I thought the part when Jem, Dill, and Scout were sneaking into the backyard of the Radley house. I thought it was funny when they were attempting to run away from the mysterious shadow that appeared as Jem was trying to take a peak in the window. While trying to escape Jem's pants got caught on the chicken wire fence and they ripped off and when asked by Atticus what happened, he blamed the loss of his pants on strip poker.
Steven 18/05/09
I really liked the part at the end of the book when Scout is walking home with Boo Radley. I like how she sees herself in his shoes, seeing herself and Jem as they grow up. I like how she finally fully comprehends the advice that Atticus gave her. This part is my favourite because Scout finally got to meet Boo, which she had long been awaiting, and this is the part of the novel where her maturity shines through.This is the point in the novel in which one the of the biggest moral lessons is put to real use.
Steven 18/05/09
Jem and Scout's mother died of an early age, leaving Atticus to raise the children by himself, with a little help from Calpurnia. If their mother had not passed away, do you think that the children would be different? How would a mother figure influence Scout? Jem? 05/05/2009 Alice
I definitely think the kids would be different, first of all i think Scout would be less of a tomboy and i think the kids would mind their manners more although i think they would still be the attention seeking, wild adventurous kids they are in the book.A mother would influence the story alot although Atticus does an excellent job as the father in the novel, he keeps a firm household and makes sure the rules are followed wich a mother would do the same.
~Megan 06/05/09
I disagree. I personally think Scout would not be very different at all if her mother were alive. It's not like she doesn't have any female influences in her life. There's Miss Maudie, for instance, whom she hangs out with most of the summer the year Dill and Jem insist on playing the Boo Radley game, and there's Aunt Alexandria, whom she visits every year at Finch's Landing on Christmas day, and who comes to stay with Atticus and the children at the beginning of chapter 13 (and stays for at least most of the summer). Not to mention Calpurnia, who has always been a big influence in the kids' lives, and who, we are told by Atticus on page 137, has raised them just as well, if not better, than any mother could have.
Jem, on the other hand, might be a little different if their mother had not died, because it says on page 6 that he remembered his mother clearly, and missed her. Still, I don't think he would be that much different either.
~Anne, 07/05/2009
If their mother had not passed away than the children would be completely different. With a mother figure in the house they would have learned all the proper ways and this would have changed Scout's character. Atticus did the best he could but this meant leaving the kids at home during the day. If their mother had been there to raise them, they wouldn't have learned to be so independent and open to new adventures
Steven 07/05/09
I agree with Steven, in that if their mother was still alive both Jem and Scout would be less independant and "fearless". However, I do not think Scout would be any different, jsut because I find her attitude and character as a unique property of her that would come through even with a female influence in the home.
Dylan 08/05/09
I guess you're right that the kids might be less independent if their mother were alive. They'd probably be a little more closely watched, and thus wouldn't be able to get away with things like sneaking out to the jail at 10 PM to check on Atticus as they did in chapter 15, or going to the courthouse to watch Tom Robinson's trial while Calpurnia and Aunt Alexandra weren't paying attention to them, as they did in chapter 16.
In fact, on the whole, the kids don't seem to receive that much attention even when Aunt Alexandra's staying with them. Calpurnia, I suppose, spends a lot of her time cooking and cleaning, and Atticus spends most of his time at work. One would think, however, that with Aunt Alexandra around, there would be someone to look after the kids. This doesn't seem to be the case, though, because Aunt Alexandra seems to spend most of her time either talking to the neighbours (p. 152: "...we saw her only at mealtimes and at night before we went to bed. It was summer and we were outdoors. Of course, some afternnons when I would run inside for a drink of water, I would find the livingroom overrun with Maycomb ladies, sipping, whispering, fanning, and I would be called: 'Jean Louise, come speak to these ladies.' "), or sleeping (p. 148: "Aunt Alexandra composed herself for a two-hour nap and dared us to make any noise in the yard..."). It kind of makes you wonder why she's even there.
If their mother were alive, she probably wouldn't ignore Jem and Scout as much as Aunt Alexandra does, so as long as Calpurnia took care of the cooking and cleaning, she would be free to watch what they were doing most of the time. Consequently, they wouldn't be able to get away with nearly as much.
~Anne, 10/05/2009
I also think that if the children's mother had been alive, the family wouldn't have necessarily needed the help of Calpurnia, and in turn would not have been influenced by her African-American culture and views. Had she not been involved in their lives, both the children and Atticus may have had different opinions when it comes to Black people. This could've altered Attius's decision to defend Tom Robinson, along with the children's motivation to back up their father's decision. Not having an influential figure like Calpurnia in their lives would easily change their views, especially under the influence of an entire town of racist citizens.
Steven 10/05/09
I think that a mother figure in the children's lives would not change them drasticly. Scout would still be the same tomboy, strong-willed loyal girl she is, and Jem would be the clever, older brother. Now, I do believe that they would have different manners and punishments and Scout may have been required to attend more girly-like functions, and on certain occasions not participate in playing with Jem and Dill for she would have to make friends of her own gendre, but I don't think that her personality would be that different.
--Alice 10/05/09 Why does Atticus feel he needs to defend Tom Robinson? Steven
Atticus feels he should defend Tom Robinson because he thinks everyone should have a fair chance, regardless of their colour. He said if he didn’t defend him he would lose his pride, and wouldn’t be able to hold his head up in town, represent this country in the legislature or tell Scout and Jem not to do something.
04/28/09 Steven
I think something in Atticus' past is in some way connected to Tom Robinson's case, and that's why Atticus feels such a strong need to defend him. I'm not sure what it is, or how or why they are connected, but Atticus tells Uncle Jack on page 88, "You know, I'd hoped to get through life without a case of this kind...", which, to me, indicates the case might be something he'd always known he'd probably encounter some day, but had some specific reason to wish to avoid it if possible. I also wonder if the event (if there is one) from Atticus' past that now compels him to defend Tom Robinson might have something to do with Boo Radley, and with Atticus' dislike of guns. Maybe not - I might be completely wrong about there even being any connection at all between Atticus' past and Tom Robinson's case. It's just a thought.
On the other hand, even if there is no connection there, I think there is almost definitely a connection between Tom Robinson's case and the mystery surrounding Boo Radley because, on page 88, Atticus tells Uncle Jack, "Why reasonable people go stark raving mad when anything involving a Negro comes up, is something I don't pretend to understand... I just hope that Jem and Scout come to me for their answers instead of listening to the town."
~Anne, 30/04/2009
I agree withAnne, I believe it has to do with Atticus' past althoug more trongly with Boo Radley. When he says "Why reasonable people go stark raving mad when anything involving a Negro comes up, is something I don't pretend to understand... I just hope that Jem and Scout come to me for their answers instead of listening to the town." I believe this is also talking about how his kids strongly believe in what the neighbours are saying about boo Radley, more specifically Dill. The Finch children listened to whatever Dill told them about their mysterious neighbour and it didnt even cross their minds that these statements could be false. I believe one of the reasons Atticus is doing the case on Tom Robinson is to teach his own children a lesson, first off to teach Scout how to handle her temper, to teach her children there is no difference other then colour when it comes to black and whites, and last I think he is doing this case because he knows the town will talk and gossip about it but he wants to teach his children to ignore it and keep their heads held high. I may be completely wrong although it makes sense, Atticus tries to keep his kids well mannered and this seems a perfect way to do so. Although Atticus doesnt want to do the case for some reason or another i think he knows it will be a challenge but he wants to rise to the occaison and show the town he is up for anything.
~Megan 03/05/09
Interesting... I hadn't thought of it that way. I don't know that I agree entirely, though. I do believe Atticus knows his children will learn a lot from this experience, but I don't believe that is one of the reasons he took on the case and tried so hard to defend Tom Robinson. I say tried so hard to defend him because, as it points out on page 88, Atticus took on the case because he had to - because Judge Taylor gave the job to him. Only, as it points out later in the novel, most lawyers in Maycomb wouldn't actually have taken the case seriously. That's what makes Atticus different, and why the town is so much against him - because he actually wants to defend a black man. And since I haven't finished the book yet, I can still only guess at what his exact reasons for that are, other than his obvious belief in the equality of all people.
~Anne, 03/05/09
I also agree, in that Atticus is defending Tom because he feels everyone should have a fair chance, as well as his children will recognize he is helping a colored man, which might get rid of their prejudice. Atticus also talked about how this case is the one in his life where he must concentrate on helping the client, no matter what.
Dylan, 05/05/09 Scout and Jem are usually polite well mannered kids, with the exception of the Radley family. Why do you think this is? Do you believe the kids assumptions about Boo Radley are true, for example how he apparently stabbed his father, Mr. Radley in the leg, or how he is a "ghost". Explain why or why not using examples from the book. 04/22/09 -Megan
I think the reason Jem and Scout are well-mannered kids is because that is how Atticus raised them to be. For example, Atticus tells Scout, on page 30, "You, Miss Scout Finch, are of the common folk. You must obey the law." No, having good manners and the obeying law are not the same thing, but it is evident from this and other instances in the novel that Atticus, with Calpurnia's help, has done his best to raise Jem and Scout well. I think the reason Jem proposes they play the Boo Radley game is because he wants to show off to Dill and to prove that he's not scared of the Radleys. It's made apparent that he's showing off when Scout says on page 38 that Jem only thought up the game to contrast his own "fearless heroism" with her cowardice.
I do not believe Boo stabbed his father in the leg with scissors, nor do I believe he is dead, or a ghost. I think he's alive because, as stated by Miss Maudie on page 43, he hasn't been carried out of his house yet.
~Anne, 23/04/2009
I think the author is unrealistically portraying these kids as well mannered and some what mature (for elementary-schoolers). However in just the book, I think the kids are definitely well mannered for their age, and I think the reason for this is the period of time, as well as social customs. I do not believe the assumptions about Boo, mainly becasue they have not been proven and biased, and this sign of no proof of death is when Miss Maudie said he had not been carried out of the house yet. One thing that does change my decision about wether the Radley's are crazy or not is win Mr. Radley was apparently shooting at Jem. I think Mr. Radley must be crazy if he can pull a gun on anyone, even if he thought it was Jem.
dylan 23/04/2009
I agree with dylan, I do/did not believe the assumptions made by the children about Boo Radley and his family although when Nathan Radley pulls out a shot gun and fires it into the air it puts a question in my head that perhaps this family really is not normal. Also it poses question in my head when Jem goes to retrieve his pants and they are sewn, not professionally but as if someone was expecting Jem to come back for them. These incidences create question and mystery and they make me doubt the fact that the Radleys are in fact sane. I believe that most of what the children talk about is rumors and they just want to create excitement in their lives such as when hey talk about Boo stabbing his father.
~Megan, 24/04/2009
I don't see how sewing someone's pants up constitutes evidence of insanity. It seemed to me like a nice thing for Boo - or whoever did it - to do. Lots of normal people possess needles and thread, after all. The one thing I'm kind of curious about is whether or not Nathan Radley knew it was Jem, Scout and Dill in his yard, or if, as Miss Maudie says on p. 54, "Mr. Radley shot at a Negro in his collard patch." And if he didn't know it was the kids when he shot at them, did he realize later when he found Jem's pants caught in the fence, or did he not find the pants at all? That is, did Arthur (Boo) find them and sew them up without Nathan ever knowing they were there, and never realizing he'd been shooting at Dill and the Finch kids?
~Anne, 26/04/2009
Good point, all the questions you just asked are now raised in my head. I think though that maybe Nathan was the one who hemmed the pants, because maybe he realised that he mistakely shot at Jem, so in return he hemmed his pants.
dylan 27/04/2009
Very true. I never thought about it in that way. Nathan could have been the one to sew Jems pants because he felt guilty for shooting at them. I find the author has a funny way of portraying the scenes in her book because it poses so many possible questions in your mind.
Megan 27/04/09
To answer Megans first question, I think that Scout and Jem are skeptical about Boo Radley, and think up ridiculous scenarios of what they think his story actually entails because it is a subject that is never openly discussed by the townspeople, and they can't help their curiosity. They let their imaginations run wild because there no one knows a definite answer about Boo Radley, and secrets such as this one are always appealing to a child's imagination. They are searching for the truth, and in the meantime come up with crazy alternatives.
Steven 27/04/09
Megan, Steven, Alice, Anne, Dylan
Many readers see To Kill a Mockingbird as having two parts, one centering on Arthur Radley and the other on the trial of Tom Robinson. How were the two stories brought together at the end of the novel? When you were reading the novel, how did you handle the shift of emphasis from Boo Radley to the trial?
At the end of the novel, the two stories are brought together when Bob Ewell - angry because the trial did not make him a hero, but rather offered Atticus the opportunity to destroy Bob's "last shred of credibility" (p. 218) - tries to kill Atticus' children, but is unsuccessful because he is stabbed by Boo Radley, who has been watching over Scout and Jem from the beginning of the novel, and who the children were deeply curious about during especially the first part of the novel.
I did not really notice the shift of emphasis from Boo Radley to the trial when it first began to occur around chapter 12, but as the book went on, I started to get increasingly bored and lose interest in the novel as the story started focusing more and more on the trial and as Scout began to act more "ladylike", and the narrative became more dry and lost most of its humour because Scout and Jem were older.
~Anne, 20/05/2009
...It would be nice if someone else could post something, so I didn't feel so much like I was talking to myself, but whatever.
I was rather disappointed by the ending of this novel. I felt it left a lot of questions open to interpretation, and as a reader I felt unsatisfied. It was kind of like one of those not-so-incredible movies where you can tell as soon as it ends, even though it's just come out, that there's already a sequel underway. Except in this case, there doesn't appear to even be a sequel. She just leaves you hanging. Some of the questions I had while I was reading that were not addressed throughout the course of the novel are as follows: Did Atticus have a particular reason for taking on Tom Robinson's case, besides just his belief in equal rights for everyone inside the courtroom? How did Atticus earn the title "One-Shot Finch" and was there a reason he later came to despise guns other than, as Miss Maudie speculates on page 98, the fact that he felt he had an "unfair advantage over most living things"? What happened to Uncle Jack? Francis? How about Uncle Jimmy, whom Aunt Alexandra abandoned when she came to stay with the Finches? Did Aunt Alexandra ever leave, by the way? What was up with Dill? That is, why did he lie about his family all the time, and why did he run away from home? Did he and Scout actually end up getting married? What was Miss Maudie's new house like? What happened to Miss Caroline (how long did she survive as a teacher)? What happened to Mayella Ewell, and, in fact, all of the Ewell children now that Bob Ewell was dead? Did Nathan Radley and old Mr. Radley have actual jobs or did they just "buy cotton" as Jem said? Where did they go everyday, and what did they do? What was Nathan's attitude toward his brother, Arthur? Toward the Finch children?
...I won't go on, but I will say that I thought this book was really good for the first 11 chapters, but from there until the end it seemed to decline, getting progressively worse and more boring until it reached the total opposite of a climax as I struggled through the last few pages just to get it over with. That is my opinion of the novel, and it is surprising (to me) because I usually enjoy the novels I have to read for English class.
~Anne, 23/05/2009
I thought it definitely had two parts although in the end they were tied together because in Tom Robinson's case it was Bob Ewell who accused him of rapeing his daughter although in the end Bob Ewell tried to attack Atticus' children and it was Boo Radley who saved them. Boo had not been outside of his home for years and years but when the kids needed him the most he was there and saved their lives. Although Boo had nothing to do with the trial in the beginning of the novel he was a very important part of the story because the kids had an obsession with him and were constantly talking about him or scheming to get him out of his house. Boo comes back in the end of the novel as the hero who saves the Finch children. The ending shocked me because I would never have thought Bob Ewell would go so far to make Atticus' life meserable, as Anne had said earlier it leaves alot of questions in the readers mind although its almost better like that because it is left to the imagination. The reader really has a chance to create there own story of what might have happened after the night of the pageant. Overall I really enjoyed the novel more then expected.
~Megan 23/05/09
I agree with Anne, I didn't take note of a drastic switch between the two events until around chapter 12, which is about when it started to be more of a chore to read because of the dragging on of the trial and lack of exciting happenings. But then the novel started to pick up again when Boo saved the children from the drunken Bob Ewell. It was somewhat of a pain when Harper Lee would focus on one event for a while, then stop before the climax of the event and switch to the other, and so on, because by the time the focus was shifted to the initial event, i had either forgotten key points or began to loose interest.
Steven 24/06/09
Ya, since the novel only had two main parts, with two main climactic events, I personally think that this novel was in a way, unmemorable and boring at some parts, I also think there is a lot of useless storytelling at times, but in the long run it helps with the atmosphere of Maycomb. I agree with Anne, in that the two main stories are brought together through the effects on the trial on Bob Ewell, and then Boo stabbing him, I also agree with Anne, in that the narrative became very dull and boring after Scout and Jem matured. I think that the book still did leave some questions, however those questions, I think, aren't so important in that it draws away from the book. All in all, I think that the book was a good tale of the american south, that transitioned between two key factors, that come together rather fluidly in the end of the novel.
-Dylan 24/06/09
What was your favourite part in this book so far? Why? What part made you laugh the most?
~Anne, 11/05/2009
My favorite part was definitely the hearing with Atticus defending Tom Robinson, it had me wanting to read more and I couldnt put the book down. Although I must say I was dissapointed that Atticus had not won the case but it really shows how the white society didnt care about the actual case and evidence they based their votes solely on the color of skin. This was my favorite part of the book so far because it kept the reader wanting to know more and as the case went along we really didnt know who was going to win until the very end when Tom was voted guilty.
~Megan 12/05/2009
I agree with Megan, in that the hearing was my favorite part, and the only reason why I think this is anyones favorite part is because it is one of the few suspenseful points in the novel, which I think came just at the right time before the book could get boring. I was also dissapointed in Atticus' defeat, however I think this isn't going to be the last time we see Tom Robinson. One part that didnt really make me laugh, but was funny, was in chapter seven, when Jem went through an Egyptian phase. "The sixth grade seemed to please him from the beginning: he went through a brief Egyptian Period that baffled me - he tried to walk flat a great deal, sticking one arm in front of him and one in back of him, putting one foot behind the other. He declared Egyptians walked that way."
-Dylan 13/05/2009
Interesting. My favourite part was actually around pages 85 to 89, when Scout talked to Uncle Jack and told him he wasn't fair because he hadn't listened to her side of the story after she beat up Francis, and later that evening when Uncle Jack talked to Atticus and told him he would never marry because he might have children. I found that entire part highly amusing, in a good way, which is why it's my favourite part. The trial, I found rather long and tedious, and it didn't actually interest me that much.
In terms of the part that made me laugh the most, many parts of this novel made me chuckle, but there were only two, I think, that made me laugh out loud. The first of these is on page 25, when Miss Caroline screams "It's alive!" and points at Burris Ewell, and Little Chuck Little responds, somewhat confused, "You mean him, ma'am? Yessum, he's alive. Did he scare you some way?". The second, which some of you may not have read yet, is on page 252, when Scout informs us she is going to play the part of a ham in the Halloween pageant ("Mrs. Grace Merriweather had composed an original pageant entitled Maycomb County: Ad Astra Per Aspera, and I was to be a ham.").
~Anne, 13/05/2009
I did not find any parts in the novel that actually made me laugh out loud but the characters and their personalities can be highly entertaining to read. All of the characters in the book or completely different other than the fact that the 3 children are all mischevious and adventurous. The fact that the characters are all different make the book more entertaining to read but I did not find many parts in the novel that actually made me laugh out loud. I never thought of pages 85-89 but that was a very interesting part to the novel although I stick with my first answer in that the hearing remains my favorite part so far.
~Megan 17/05/09
Ya nothing really made me laugh, and the reason for this is just because it is simply older humor, that is sometimes hard to get. However, this does not mean I didn't find anything funny, it just means it isn't the type of humor that would make me laugh out loud.
-Dylan 18/05/09
I thought the part when Jem, Dill, and Scout were sneaking into the backyard of the Radley house. I thought it was funny when they were attempting to run away from the mysterious shadow that appeared as Jem was trying to take a peak in the window. While trying to escape Jem's pants got caught on the chicken wire fence and they ripped off and when asked by Atticus what happened, he blamed the loss of his pants on strip poker.
Steven 18/05/09
I really liked the part at the end of the book when Scout is walking home with Boo Radley. I like how she sees herself in his shoes, seeing herself and Jem as they grow up. I like how she finally fully comprehends the advice that Atticus gave her. This part is my favourite because Scout finally got to meet Boo, which she had long been awaiting, and this is the part of the novel where her maturity shines through.This is the point in the novel in which one the of the biggest moral lessons is put to real use.
Steven 18/05/09
Jem and Scout's mother died of an early age, leaving Atticus to raise the children by himself, with a little help from Calpurnia. If their mother had not passed away, do you think that the children would be different? How would a mother figure influence Scout? Jem? 05/05/2009 Alice
I definitely think the kids would be different, first of all i think Scout would be less of a tomboy and i think the kids would mind their manners more although i think they would still be the attention seeking, wild adventurous kids they are in the book.A mother would influence the story alot although Atticus does an excellent job as the father in the novel, he keeps a firm household and makes sure the rules are followed wich a mother would do the same.
~Megan 06/05/09
I disagree. I personally think Scout would not be very different at all if her mother were alive. It's not like she doesn't have any female influences in her life. There's Miss Maudie, for instance, whom she hangs out with most of the summer the year Dill and Jem insist on playing the Boo Radley game, and there's Aunt Alexandria, whom she visits every year at Finch's Landing on Christmas day, and who comes to stay with Atticus and the children at the beginning of chapter 13 (and stays for at least most of the summer). Not to mention Calpurnia, who has always been a big influence in the kids' lives, and who, we are told by Atticus on page 137, has raised them just as well, if not better, than any mother could have.
Jem, on the other hand, might be a little different if their mother had not died, because it says on page 6 that he remembered his mother clearly, and missed her. Still, I don't think he would be that much different either.
~Anne, 07/05/2009
If their mother had not passed away than the children would be completely different. With a mother figure in the house they would have learned all the proper ways and this would have changed Scout's character. Atticus did the best he could but this meant leaving the kids at home during the day. If their mother had been there to raise them, they wouldn't have learned to be so independent and open to new adventuresSteven 07/05/09
I agree with Steven, in that if their mother was still alive both Jem and Scout would be less independant and "fearless". However, I do not think Scout would be any different, jsut because I find her attitude and character as a unique property of her that would come through even with a female influence in the home.
Dylan 08/05/09
I guess you're right that the kids might be less independent if their mother were alive. They'd probably be a little more closely watched, and thus wouldn't be able to get away with things like sneaking out to the jail at 10 PM to check on Atticus as they did in chapter 15, or going to the courthouse to watch Tom Robinson's trial while Calpurnia and Aunt Alexandra weren't paying attention to them, as they did in chapter 16.
In fact, on the whole, the kids don't seem to receive that much attention even when Aunt Alexandra's staying with them. Calpurnia, I suppose, spends a lot of her time cooking and cleaning, and Atticus spends most of his time at work. One would think, however, that with Aunt Alexandra around, there would be someone to look after the kids. This doesn't seem to be the case, though, because Aunt Alexandra seems to spend most of her time either talking to the neighbours (p. 152: "...we saw her only at mealtimes and at night before we went to bed. It was summer and we were outdoors. Of course, some afternnons when I would run inside for a drink of water, I would find the livingroom overrun with Maycomb ladies, sipping, whispering, fanning, and I would be called: 'Jean Louise, come speak to these ladies.' "), or sleeping (p. 148: "Aunt Alexandra composed herself for a two-hour nap and dared us to make any noise in the yard..."). It kind of makes you wonder why she's even there.
If their mother were alive, she probably wouldn't ignore Jem and Scout as much as Aunt Alexandra does, so as long as Calpurnia took care of the cooking and cleaning, she would be free to watch what they were doing most of the time. Consequently, they wouldn't be able to get away with nearly as much.
~Anne, 10/05/2009
I also think that if the children's mother had been alive, the family wouldn't have necessarily needed the help of Calpurnia, and in turn would not have been influenced by her African-American culture and views. Had she not been involved in their lives, both the children and Atticus may have had different opinions when it comes to Black people. This could've altered Attius's decision to defend Tom Robinson, along with the children's motivation to back up their father's decision. Not having an influential figure like Calpurnia in their lives would easily change their views, especially under the influence of an entire town of racist citizens.
Steven 10/05/09
I think that a mother figure in the children's lives would not change them drasticly. Scout would still be the same tomboy, strong-willed loyal girl she is, and Jem would be the clever, older brother. Now, I do believe that they would have different manners and punishments and Scout may have been required to attend more girly-like functions, and on certain occasions not participate in playing with Jem and Dill for she would have to make friends of her own gendre, but I don't think that her personality would be that different.
--Alice 10/05/09
Why does Atticus feel he needs to defend Tom Robinson? Steven
Atticus feels he should defend Tom Robinson because he thinks everyone should have a fair chance, regardless of their colour. He said if he didn’t defend him he would lose his pride, and wouldn’t be able to hold his head up in town, represent this country in the legislature or tell Scout and Jem not to do something.
04/28/09 Steven
I think something in Atticus' past is in some way connected to Tom Robinson's case, and that's why Atticus feels such a strong need to defend him. I'm not sure what it is, or how or why they are connected, but Atticus tells Uncle Jack on page 88, "You know, I'd hoped to get through life without a case of this kind...", which, to me, indicates the case might be something he'd always known he'd probably encounter some day, but had some specific reason to wish to avoid it if possible. I also wonder if the event (if there is one) from Atticus' past that now compels him to defend Tom Robinson might have something to do with Boo Radley, and with Atticus' dislike of guns. Maybe not - I might be completely wrong about there even being any connection at all between Atticus' past and Tom Robinson's case. It's just a thought.
On the other hand, even if there is no connection there, I think there is almost definitely a connection between Tom Robinson's case and the mystery surrounding Boo Radley because, on page 88, Atticus tells Uncle Jack, "Why reasonable people go stark raving mad when anything involving a Negro comes up, is something I don't pretend to understand... I just hope that Jem and Scout come to me for their answers instead of listening to the town."
~Anne, 30/04/2009
I agree withAnne, I believe it has to do with Atticus' past althoug more trongly with Boo Radley. When he says "Why reasonable people go stark raving mad when anything involving a Negro comes up, is something I don't pretend to understand... I just hope that Jem and Scout come to me for their answers instead of listening to the town." I believe this is also talking about how his kids strongly believe in what the neighbours are saying about boo Radley, more specifically Dill. The Finch children listened to whatever Dill told them about their mysterious neighbour and it didnt even cross their minds that these statements could be false. I believe one of the reasons Atticus is doing the case on Tom Robinson is to teach his own children a lesson, first off to teach Scout how to handle her temper, to teach her children there is no difference other then colour when it comes to black and whites, and last I think he is doing this case because he knows the town will talk and gossip about it but he wants to teach his children to ignore it and keep their heads held high. I may be completely wrong although it makes sense, Atticus tries to keep his kids well mannered and this seems a perfect way to do so. Although Atticus doesnt want to do the case for some reason or another i think he knows it will be a challenge but he wants to rise to the occaison and show the town he is up for anything.
~Megan 03/05/09
Interesting... I hadn't thought of it that way. I don't know that I agree entirely, though. I do believe Atticus knows his children will learn a lot from this experience, but I don't believe that is one of the reasons he took on the case and tried so hard to defend Tom Robinson. I say tried so hard to defend him because, as it points out on page 88, Atticus took on the case because he had to - because Judge Taylor gave the job to him. Only, as it points out later in the novel, most lawyers in Maycomb wouldn't actually have taken the case seriously. That's what makes Atticus different, and why the town is so much against him - because he actually wants to defend a black man. And since I haven't finished the book yet, I can still only guess at what his exact reasons for that are, other than his obvious belief in the equality of all people.
~Anne, 03/05/09
I also agree, in that Atticus is defending Tom because he feels everyone should have a fair chance, as well as his children will recognize he is helping a colored man, which might get rid of their prejudice. Atticus also talked about how this case is the one in his life where he must concentrate on helping the client, no matter what.
Dylan, 05/05/09
Scout and Jem are usually polite well mannered kids, with the exception of the Radley family. Why do you think this is? Do you believe the kids assumptions about Boo Radley are true, for example how he apparently stabbed his father, Mr. Radley in the leg, or how he is a "ghost". Explain why or why not using examples from the book. 04/22/09 -Megan
I think the reason Jem and Scout are well-mannered kids is because that is how Atticus raised them to be. For example, Atticus tells Scout, on page 30, "You, Miss Scout Finch, are of the common folk. You must obey the law." No, having good manners and the obeying law are not the same thing, but it is evident from this and other instances in the novel that Atticus, with Calpurnia's help, has done his best to raise Jem and Scout well. I think the reason Jem proposes they play the Boo Radley game is because he wants to show off to Dill and to prove that he's not scared of the Radleys. It's made apparent that he's showing off when Scout says on page 38 that Jem only thought up the game to contrast his own "fearless heroism" with her cowardice.
I do not believe Boo stabbed his father in the leg with scissors, nor do I believe he is dead, or a ghost. I think he's alive because, as stated by Miss Maudie on page 43, he hasn't been carried out of his house yet.
~Anne, 23/04/2009
I think the author is unrealistically portraying these kids as well mannered and some what mature (for elementary-schoolers). However in just the book, I think the kids are definitely well mannered for their age, and I think the reason for this is the period of time, as well as social customs. I do not believe the assumptions about Boo, mainly becasue they have not been proven and biased, and this sign of no proof of death is when Miss Maudie said he had not been carried out of the house yet. One thing that does change my decision about wether the Radley's are crazy or not is win Mr. Radley was apparently shooting at Jem. I think Mr. Radley must be crazy if he can pull a gun on anyone, even if he thought it was Jem.
dylan 23/04/2009
I agree with dylan, I do/did not believe the assumptions made by the children about Boo Radley and his family although when Nathan Radley pulls out a shot gun and fires it into the air it puts a question in my head that perhaps this family really is not normal. Also it poses question in my head when Jem goes to retrieve his pants and they are sewn, not professionally but as if someone was expecting Jem to come back for them. These incidences create question and mystery and they make me doubt the fact that the Radleys are in fact sane. I believe that most of what the children talk about is rumors and they just want to create excitement in their lives such as when hey talk about Boo stabbing his father.
~Megan, 24/04/2009
I don't see how sewing someone's pants up constitutes evidence of insanity. It seemed to me like a nice thing for Boo - or whoever did it - to do. Lots of normal people possess needles and thread, after all. The one thing I'm kind of curious about is whether or not Nathan Radley knew it was Jem, Scout and Dill in his yard, or if, as Miss Maudie says on p. 54, "Mr. Radley shot at a Negro in his collard patch." And if he didn't know it was the kids when he shot at them, did he realize later when he found Jem's pants caught in the fence, or did he not find the pants at all? That is, did Arthur (Boo) find them and sew them up without Nathan ever knowing they were there, and never realizing he'd been shooting at Dill and the Finch kids?
~Anne, 26/04/2009
Good point, all the questions you just asked are now raised in my head. I think though that maybe Nathan was the one who hemmed the pants, because maybe he realised that he mistakely shot at Jem, so in return he hemmed his pants.
dylan 27/04/2009
Very true. I never thought about it in that way. Nathan could have been the one to sew Jems pants because he felt guilty for shooting at them. I find the author has a funny way of portraying the scenes in her book because it poses so many possible questions in your mind.
Megan 27/04/09
To answer Megans first question, I think that Scout and Jem are skeptical about Boo Radley, and think up ridiculous scenarios of what they think his story actually entails because it is a subject that is never openly discussed by the townspeople, and they can't help their curiosity. They let their imaginations run wild because there no one knows a definite answer about Boo Radley, and secrets such as this one are always appealing to a child's imagination. They are searching for the truth, and in the meantime come up with crazy alternatives.
Steven 27/04/09